1 TIMOTHY 1:16 PAUL IS OUR PATTERN OF SALVATION

[douge]

15 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

Yes but the OP title does not say that... words have meanings and consequences.

I was trying to convey that Paul is our pattern for salvation unto eternal life in this dispensation.

I mention following Paul in another post (2 Timothy 3:10 WHERE DOES THE CHURCH FIND DOCTRINE) as a pattern for doctrine.

[Justin Adams]

5 minutes ago, douge said:

I was trying to convey that Paul is our pattern for salvation unto eternal life in this dispensation.

I mention following Paul in another post (2 Timothy 3:10 WHERE DOES THE CHURCH FIND DOCTRINE) as a pattern for doctrine.

I understand. You must see that the OP title is www searchable though.. do not want to give the wrong idea is all.

Edited October 25, 2019 by Justin Adams

[douge]

2 hours ago, OneLight said:

What Jesus did for Paul, He also did for others as well.  Just as you and I are in Him, He has worked in you according to where you were and where He wants you to go, which is different for me as we are not the same.  You cannot write for me and neither can I write for you.  Did you expect to find Paul's life in other epistles?  Peter wrote of what he was shown, as did James.  Each have their message we need to adhere to.

Well..... I see what you are saying but, we are to adhere to the gospel found in Paul.

Peter and James are written to Israel. Peter preached the gospel of the Davidic kingdom on earth promised Israel...that is not our gospel.

[OneLight]

1 minute ago, douge said:

Well..... I see what you are saying but, we are to adhere to the gospel found in Paul.

Peter and James are written to Israel. Peter preached the gospel of the Davidic kingdom on earth promised Israel...that is not our gospel.

I guess you had not yet read my reply in your other thread, so I'll paste the scripture here.

2 Timothy 3:16-17

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. 

Notice Paul was telling Timothy that all scripture, not just what he said, but all scripture.  The argument that the NT was not yet written is moot as God knew what would be included as scripture.

[Justin Adams]

11 hours ago, OneLight said:

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. 

Good quote and this includes scriptures that the church fathers thought worthy and that Yeshua and the apostles read... most of which has been outlawed by the church. Second temple literature was well thought of and all people in that time frame that were literate would know far more than we do today...

[OneLight]

5 hours ago, Justin Adams said:

Good quote and this includes scriptures that the church fathers thought worthy and that Yeshua and the apostles read... most of which has been outlawed by the church. Second temple literature was well thought of and all people in that time frame that were literate would know far more than we do today...

I am sure they had an understanding that went beyond the Tanakh, just as we do today.  Just because they had the knowledge doesn't mean they were art of their canon.  Can you provide a list the books you are referring to?

[Justin Adams]

11 minutes ago, OneLight said:

I am sure they had an understanding that went beyond the Tanakh, just as we do today.  Just because they had the knowledge doesn't mean they were art of their canon.  Can you provide a list the books you are referring to?

Much is quoted and alluded to that we would not consider canon. Even Saul refered to Greek myth on occasion and also some pagan stuff. He just took the concepts as they were contemporaneous and relevent to his audiences - both Israeli and non-Israeli.

They leave breadcrumbs all over their writings that harken back to the Tanakh and Enoch, plus the original canon of the earlier scriptures. The 14 books the the RCC removed can also be useful. All of them have some kind of relevance and even the Tanakh re-purposes much of the Mesopotamian and Ugaritic texts. The 'cloud rider' is a good example. John 10 I believe. 

It is important for me to understand the later scripts by examining the context of the writings in the time they were written. Much allusion can be seen when some of the myths actually correspond to the early Hebrew writers.

Qumran is a good repository of such textuaral evidence, and though we do no take the church father's views that they should all be canon, they are useful in informing us of the contexts in which they were written. Paul and Jude both writing under inspiration quote Enoch 1. Some of their turns of phrase also indicate they read books that have been obscured for us today.

Second temple literature abounds with discussions about the second person of the Godhead - that's why the Septuagint was later considered heretical (about 200 AD).

Edited October 26, 2019 by Justin Adams

[OneLight]

14 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

Much is quoted and alluded to that we would not consider canon. Even Saul refered to Greek myth on occasion and also some pagan stuff. He just took the concepts as they were contemporaneous and relevent to his audiences - both Israeli and non-Israeli.

They leave breadcrumbs all over their writings that harken back to the Tanakh and Enoch, plus the original canon of the earlier scriptures. The 14 books the the RCC removed can also be useful. All of them have some kind of relevance and even the Tanakh re-purposes much of the Mesopotamian and Ugaritic texts. The 'cloud rider' is a good example. John 10 I believe. 

It is important for me to understand the later scripts by examining the context of the writings in the time they were written. Much allusion can be seen when some of the myths actually correspond to the early Hebrew writers.

Qumran is a good repository of such textuaral evidence, and though we do no take the church father's views that they should all be canon, they are useful in informing us of the contexts in which they were written. Paul and Jude both writing under inspiration quote Enoch 1. Some of their turns of phrase also indicate they read books that have been obscured for us today.

Second temple literature abounds with discussions about the second person of the Godhead - that's why the Septuagint was later considered heretical (about 200 AD).

I see as we also use text books of all sorts when pointing to events in the past or present.  Still, not being scriptural, we need to keep them outside of scripture, not within scripture.  I had thought, when reading your response, that you believed there were books removed from the canon that you believed should be in the canon.

[Justin Adams]

1 minute ago, OneLight said:

I see as we also use text books of all sorts when pointing to events in the past or present.  Still, not being scriptural, we need to keep them outside of scripture, not within scripture.  I had thought, when reading your response, that you believed there were books removed from the canon that you believed should be in the canon.

It is possible to learn stuff without and within canon. Canon is a little arbitrary, but since today we do have all these extra texts, I see that Providence has been at work. I know some live and many have died by the canon (there are at least three I know of), but for me it does no really matter. For instance, I will bet that JEHU is an interesting book, yet it is lost for now. I do not see the Lord as being hampered one tiny bit by what we have and do not have. As John rightly says, the very world could not contain the books if all were written down about Yeshua's life on earth.

I do believe that history bears me out in the knowledge that canon has caused many unnecessary deaths and tortures. So I often wonder just how much blood has been spilled over man's ideas and arguments about scriptures. It is a sobering thing to me.

[OneLight]

4 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

It is possible to learn stuff without and within canon. Canon is a little arbitrary, but since today we do have all these extra texts, I see that Providence has been at work. I know some live and many have died by the canon (there are at least three I know of), but for me it does no really matter. For instance, I will bet that JEHU is an interesting book, yet it is lost for now. I do not see the Lord as being hampered one tiny bit by what we have and do not have. As John rightly says, the very world could not contain the books if all were written down about Yeshua's life on earth.

I do believe that history bears me out in the knowledge that canon has caused many unnecessary deaths and tortures. So I often wonder just how much blood has been spilled over man's ideas and arguments about scriptures. It is a sobering thing to me.

Scripture is not to blame for what man does with it, man is.  All the more reason to stick to scripture when discussing issues it speaks to.  When man stands on his high places and claims to have the real truth while ignoring the core values found in scripture, or when he combines worldly knowledge with scripture, be very weary.